KK river sizing logic check

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (5 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from Play Online Poker, Site Reviews & Poker Forum | FlopTurnRiver.com

SB ($8.69)
Hero (BB) ($17.68)
UTG ($11.55)
MP ($20.43)
Button ($19.69)

Preflop: Hero is BB with Khttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...es/diamond.gif, Khttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/spade.gif
1 fold, MP bets $0.30, 2 folds, Hero raises to $0.90, MP calls $0.60

Flop: ($1.85) 7http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ilies/club.gif, 6http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ilies/club.gif, 3http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero bets $1.20, MP calls $1.20

Turn: ($4.25) 7http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...es/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero bets $3, MP calls $3

River: ($10.25) Ahttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero bets $3, 1 fold

Total pot: $10.25 | Rake: $0.46


My logic in betting small on the river is because i could get called by worse 88-QQ and i didn't want to bet say $7 and get jammed on as the river was a bad card for me. Although i hold blockers to AK a hand he might check call 2 streets with there's still a few combos out there and he could possibly hold AQ as well.

Although i felt during play he was more weighted towards TT-QQ and AK sometimes as well but not as much because he seemed to be playing pretty snug.

Thoughts?

Ok so i just stoved KK vs a calling range for villain and it came out;

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

144 games 0.000 secs 28,800 games/sec

Board: 7c 6c 3s 7d As
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 25.000% 25.00% 00.00% 36 0.00 { QQ-TT, AKs, AKo }
Hand 1: 75.000% 75.00% 00.00% 108 0.00 { KK }

So it looks like i missed out on some serious value on river seems to be a clear bet/fold for value now.

I actually don't think you loss value at all. Your river bet is a blocker bet, since checking would give the opponent the chance to bet big and put you in a tough spot. However, with the bet that you did, you can extract value from worse hands (except maybe AK/AQ, which might still call), while monster hands would raise for value and tell you exactly where you stand with KK.

Yeah that's what i was doing putting out a blocking bet but looking at it now i think a straight up value bet would be best, especially for the times we get looked up by TT-QQ. Although betting larger to ~$7 could affect his calling frequency with these hands and he may only call with AQ-AK when the bets so large.

Hmm still not sure what's best here, maybe increase the sizing to 1/2 pot and he will still call with TT-QQ with some frequency. Giving him 3:1 on a call.

Also i don't expect him to recognize i was block betting and auto raise knowing my range isn't super strong.

I am not sure at all about your river calling range above:

1) QQ-TT: this is probably one of these he folded (could include 88 and 99 as well: since the stacks are super deep he would be justified set mining pre). He gets 3b pre, but holds an overpair on the flop and turn, which would justify his calls. However the river A leaves him no hope of beating anything you could be holding.

2) AK: would he really call the flop and turn with naked AK? The only A's I can see him getting to the river with are AcKc, AcQc, maybe AcJc.

wp, sir. I like it. I think you're right about a bigger bet forcing Villain's range to nutted hands. I'd bet the same OTR.

Poisonous thought incoming. Careful.

Ready? K

Im fearful that bets smaller than 1/2pot are considered "weak" and get raised often. Therefore, i hate using this size when my intention is to bet/fold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daviddem

I am not sure at all about your river calling range above:

1) QQ-TT: this is probably one of these he folded (could include 88 and 99 as well.

---

I'm unsure myself, although TT-QQ may still call 1/2 pot size bet for these reasons;

1) They beat a bluff like 2 random broadways i decided to 3barrel or a FD on the flop and the A is a scare card that i might bluff at pretty often so he may talk himself into making a hero call.

2) Their aren't many aces in my range that would take a bet bet bet line often here only AA, i'm never triple barreling AKo only AcKc. So there's only a few combos of aces there. Although this point may be irrelevant as he may not even be putting me on a range at all.

I think i'm still leaning towards a $5-$6.50 being the best sizing for this river spot, if anyone else can provide solid logic for an alternative size or play speak up. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

2) Their aren't many aces in my range that would take a bet bet bet line often here only AA, i'm never triple barreling AKo only AcKc. So there's only a few combos of aces there. Although this point may be irrelevant as he may not even be putting me on a range at all.

---

You mean if you had double-barreled AK or AQ on the flop and turn you wouldn't bet this river!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JKDS

Im fearful that bets smaller than 1/2pot are considered "weak" and get raised often. Therefore, i hate using this size when my intention is to bet/fold.

---

This usually doesn't happen at 10nl, although i don't find myself betting small on the river pretty much ever this hand is one of the only instances i have done it.

But if he starts raising our small river bets say ~1/3 of the pot when we hold hands with SD value, we can just start betting a polarized range of strong and weaker SD hands then with the same sizing. He is then raising for no reason whatsoever if he raises he's either raising into a strong hand that has him beat or folding out a hand he may beat by simply calling (but thats less likely), without risking any more of his stack by raising into a strong hand. Obviously he will still be raising his nut hands too.

The weaker part of our range should't be super weak though hands that will show a profit when called such as in this example KK QQ A9s

then the strong range we could bet 1/3 pot with something could be something like AK AA AQ

This just seems to be a good way to passify his river aggression we are on some level manipulating him into playing passively, that is folding or calling instead of raising and when he raises we can be sure he's not bluffing nearly enough to be exploiting us so we can fold decent hands and be happy about it.

I think the point im trying to make here is that we shouldn't decide not to play a certain way because we are "fearful we might get raised" what if villain never raises small river bets and we get cheap showdowns when we want them?

If we notice villain has a tendency to raise small river bets we can then make an adjustment to exploit this such as bet only strong hands or a mixture of strong and weak hands etc. But only if we have to, your not going to bet 1/3 pot with a nut hand if villain is simply calling most river bets.

Also i don't think implementing this strategy in 100% of HU river spots vs a guy who raises small river bets would be optimal either. Play ABC 1/2 the time at the river then implement the small bet strategy 1/2 the time at the river this would probably be better and cause him to make a lot of mistakes.

That's a long one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daviddem

You mean if you had double-barreled AK or AQ on the flop and turn you wouldn't bet this river!?

---

No, i mean i wouldn't double barrel AQ-AK vs this opponent in this spot without having the AcQc AcKc. So it cuts down on the Ax combos in my range.

Against a villain who never bluffs, I would probably check the river because a whole lot of his range which you beat won't call a bet (missed draws and arguably PPs) and a whole lot of his calling range now beats you (AcXc, A3s, A6s).

In practice if you check, he might well bluff, plus some stubborn PP could still call when you bet, so I like b/f, but bet as small as possible, call it for thin value. The only reason I would bet bigger has been stated by JKDS above: some opps are capable of picking on weakness. Against such very aggro opps, who will almost always bet if you check, regardless of what they hold, then c/c also becomes an option.

It's a tricky one, betting is definitely superior to checking.

I think betting $5 is good because he might call with TT-QQ thinking we are bluffing the ace, also his range is weighted more towards PP's it's a lot more likely he got to the river with TT-QQ that AJ-AK. Barring AJs-AKs but he may raise the flop some % of the time as well and try and get stacks in with these hands so its slightly less likely again he has one of the few Ax combos and he probably doesn't call pre with ahnds like A3 A6 to a 3bet from the blinds.

i like your line a lot
as jkds said, there is some risk of inducing a bluff on the river with your sizing, but it's not likely at all at 5nl given that aces are scary for most of their range and they're not going to be the type of player to bluff JJ into a river ace

Seems fine. A bit more pre maybe?

I think it looks fine and in game I prob bet/fold the same, but its a tough one, I feel we get jammed on more with this sizing than $5-$7, I think if we bet $3 and raised, there is at least some chance we're being bluffed by some missed draw or something, if we get jammed on after betting $6 or $7 I feel there's prob no bluffs as we look a bit stronger, if you have an Ace, or a 7 say, your betting more on this river, this bet says that we can fold here imo

But if villain is going to bluff raise a river here with TT-QQ then fair play to him

c/c or B/F $8